|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | Re: GISList: OGC and Standards |
| Date: |
01/07/2003 11:20:54 AM |
| From: |
Ron Lake |
|
|
Yup - I think that's a wrap !!
Ron
creediii@mindspring.com wrote:
> Anthony -
>
> I hate to jump into this public discussion/debate once again.
>
> However, I must correct your misrepresentation of a couple of statements I
> made in a private email to one member of the GISList.
>
> First, in terms of OGC revenue, my statement was that 95% of the funding for
> the Consortium operations was from sources other than the major GIS vendors.
>
> Second, in my comments regarding users, I am not sure why you say I took such
> a US centric view. I have previously listed many other non US organizations
> who are users of GIS technology and who also particpate in OGC activities.
> These include consumer organizations from Europe, Asia, and Australia.
>
> Having followed this discussion from the beginning, it is obvious to me that
> we are beginning to enter the cirular argument phase. In IETF parlance, this
> is becoming a "rathole" discussion. As such, this discussion may be becoming
> counter productive. Personally, I would rather we all use our energies to
> promote the effective use of geospatial technology and serve our communities
> as best we can regardless of our philosophical and/or technical differences.
>
> Thank you to everyone who has particpated in this discussion. Regardless of
> the differences in viewpoint, such discussions keep everyone thinking and our
> discipline vigourous.
>
> Happy Holidays to all!
>
> Carl Reed
> OGC
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:09:32 -0500 Anthony Quartararo
> <ajq3@spatialnetworks.com> wrote:
>
> > Sonny,
> >
> > Nicely articulated. However, the debate has
> > hardly deteriorated at all,
> > given the sheer number of off-list emails I
> > have received in support of not
> > only my comments/positions, but others of like
> > perspective. I can only
> > surmise that there is a significant number of
> > people that are
> > disenfranchised, disappointed, disillusioned
> > and otherwise dismayed at the
> > state of the industry, in no small part due to
> > OGC and it's sugar-daddies.
> >
> > Further, I'm glad as well to see a refreshing
> > piece of candor and frankness
> > from you, and I echo what Dimitri said
> > regarding the larger OGC market spin.
> > Be honest and clear about what OGC's mission
> > and efforts and don't pretend
> > there are no hidden agendas. Carl Reed replied
> > to another person off-line
> > (the post was made public by someone else so
> > it's fair game), that 95% of
> > OGC's revenue comes from the like of USGS,
> > Census, NIMA, Ordnance Survey
> > and the like. I'll take his word for it, even
> > though my math differs from
> > his math based on OGCs website figures. If
> > this is true, this is a
> > regrettably scenario. USGS, Census, NIMA, et
> > al should absolutely not be
> > involved in controlling the destiny of
> > "interoperability" at any level,
> > whether "internet only", "desktop", or
> > wherever. The devote public funds
> > towards proprietary private technology is
> > wrong. The organizations do not
> > represent the global geospatial user base nor
> > do they have that
> > constituency's best interest(s) at heart. To
> > further quote Dr. Reed in this
> > email, he suggests that vendors appreciate
> > getting the feedback from "users"
> > to help drive product development. As I assert
> > that the dubious title of
> > user as bestowed on USGS, etc. is a falsehood,
> > I was unaware that a prime
> > objective of OGC was to help vendors refine
> > product. Does this bother only
> > me ? First we have major US Government
> > organizations providing a majority of
> > the funding to OGC and in turn, they get to act
> > unilaterally as
> > representatives for GIS users worldwide in
> > defining highly focused
> > specifications
> > (http://www.directionsmag.com/pressreleases.php?press_id=6151)?
> > Who do you
> > think supplies 90-99% of US Government GIS
> > software ? Is the term "coverage"
> > not a proprietary term referring to one
> > specific vendor's data model ? Talk
> > about not letting the left hand know what the
> > right hand is doing, come on!
> >
> >
> > I too admit that I am somewhat numb to the
> > subtleties of what OGC's real
> > mission is, whether it is for GIS in general
> > (encompassing enterprises,
> > desktop, PDA, mobile devices, int
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
